linux-kernel - Re: perf: use after free in perf_remove_from

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <538765E5.7010200@oracle.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 May 2014 12:52:53 -0400
From:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, acme@...stprotocols.net,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf: use after free in perf_remove_from_context

On 05/29/2014 12:50 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > 
>> > So the only caller to sync_child_event() is that loop. According to what you said
>> > it should be safe to remove that mutex lock, but doing that triggers a list
>> > corruption:
>> > 
>> > [ 1204.341887] WARNING: CPU: 20 PID: 12839 at lib/list_debug.c:62 __list_del_entry+0xa1/0xe0()
>> > [ 1204.347597] list_del corruption. next->prev should be ffff8806ca68b108, but was ffff88051a67c398
>> > [...]
>> > 
>> > I don't see how that would happen :/
> No, what I said is that the mutex in perf_event_exit_task() should be
> sufficient to guard the list iteration calling __perf_event_exit_task().
> 
> Ading the RCU was a bit of paranoia.. 

Oh, my bad, I thought you referred to the mutex lock in sync_child_event().


Thanks,
Sasha
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/